7JULY16_29TH PERSUASIVE APPEAL_PRESIDENT DUTERTE TO THE COURT : CORRUPTION HAVE TO BE STOPPED

JULY 7, 2016  SALUTATION Dear Chief Justice Sereno, et al: MESSAGE As magistrates of the PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT concerned about  the social ills profoundly discussed by President Duterte,  you have in your discretion to accept or deny the fact that  there is peoples' erosion of faith in our judicial system, as part of the real problems confronting the nation today.   You might have listened to the sound bite or read notes regarding this issue but to reiterate the president's  lamentations I have the excerpts provided especially for you: [1]"There are many among us who advance the assessment the problems that bedevil our country today which need to be addressed with urgency are  CORRUPTION both in high and low echelons of government,  CRIMINALITY in the streets, and  the rampant sale of ILLEGAL DRUGS in all strata of Philippine society  and the breakdown of LAW AND ORDER True but not absolutely so, for I say these ills are symptoms of a viral social disease  that creeps and cuts into the moral fiber of Philippine society.  I sense a problem deeper and more serious than than any of those  mentioned, or all of them put together, but of course, it is not to say that we will ignore them,  because they have to be stopped by means, by all means that the law allows.   Erosion of faith and trust in the government, THAT IS THE REAL PROBLEM that confronts us, resolving that from,  I see the erosion of the peoples' trust in our country's leaders,  the EROSION OF FAITH IN OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM,  the erosion of confidence in the capacity of our public servants to make the peoples' lives BETTER, SAFER AND HEALTHIER. " _President Rodrigo Roa Duterte from his Inaugural  speech  June 30, 2016 CORRUPTION,  both in high and low echelons of government and if may I add, Corruption is to the human society and toxin is to the human body. Human interactions like blood being pumped through the heart then to the brain and to vital  organs of the human body through the largest and smallest arteries and veins and had to be  constantly cleaned by the kidney out of toxins in normal healthy functioning body vis-a-vis vibrant human society.   Today, the human body is sick. His blood is seriously contaminated with toxins but his kidney had failed and the human body is dying.  So with  the Philippine society.  Good that  the Philippines  found a kidney and a surgeon rolled into one in the person of President Duterte.  As a kidney, he has  processed fresh blood which liven up hope and fulfillment of peoples' aspirations for an honest and responsive government, where in the past had just been a pile of continuing years of toxic  frustration and angst and disillusionment. and hopelessness and despair. As a surgeon,  he is trained  to determine when the wound could still be treated by antiseptics or antibiotics or has to be managed by amputation or castration. Your honors, the choice is yours to make. Corruption has to be stopped, said the surgeon, clear and straightforward.  The president, with his several years as prosecutor and fiscal and a professor in criminal law is not brainless or ignorant to whom you can hide your corruption and crimes from. The president as a surgeon has the capacity of extricating gangrenes, shallow and deep alike and with all due respect, you may want to reform yourselves to revitalize the judicial institution which had been in the rotten state of decay and decomposition then do it  or  you might as well stay put and keep the your malignant disease gangrenes of corruption and be extricated yourselves in due time.  As the president in a number of speeches had warned the Abu Sayaff, "There will be days of reckoning..."  the same is aptly I believe he may have wanted be addressed to you. Corruption, your honors, as I experienced dealing with you and the rest of your employees had been part of the normal daily chores of  doing judicial business in the Supreme Court. Corruption is rampant.  Everyone else is corrupt.  Corruption in the Supreme Court like trash,  is noticeable when there is one in a clean environment.  Even one as minute as a cigarette butt is easy to pinpoint when it, as I reiterate, is in a clean environment .  But when trash and garbage and filth abounds everywhere, no one could ever know though tons more are added to them.  That is the reality in the Philippine Supreme Court, perception of uprightness are mere cosmetics and products of their own self adulation, in contrast with their real malignant crookedness and corruption.  That is the reason why Atty.  Enriqueta Vidal failed to take judicial notice on corruption laden exposition[2] from my Motion for Reconsideration dated October 30, 2008 specifically item number 9.2  because corruption is everywhere.  Everyone else is corrupt anyway. As in my previous persuasive appeal, the president, in case you deny the veracity of his observations and continued to preserve the status quo for your own client and personal benefit and interest and relentlessly resumed your corrupt and wicked ways and farther fanned the flames engulfing the remaining pillars of faith the people have in you, then, he may,  as expected resort to the political options of impeachment as  means to catapult reforms in the judicial system as maybe necessary.   In this regard,  you may want to re-evaluate your position regarding the manner you are treating me. Time is on my side. Every ticks file up to my benefit as it amounts to prolonged and sustained pain and injury and suffering, that you deliberately,  with evil motive,  meant and intended against me and my family and convincingly serve as evidence of collusion between you and Shell being having unity of purpose,  through your grave abuse of discretion and deliberate gross inexcusable negligence, to perpetuate the injustice,  pain and suffering to my family and myself which we are are experiencing since 2003 up to the present time. May you be guided by the following:  "SEC 200_ Where-ever law ends, tyranny begins, if the law be transgressed to another's harm; and whosoever in authority exceeds the power given him by the law, and makes use of the force he has under his command, to compass that upon the subject, which the law allows not, ceases in that to be a magistrate; and, acting without authority, may be opposed, as any other man, who by force invades the right of another. This is acknowledged in subordinate magistrates. He that hath authority to seize my person in the street, may be opposed as a thief and a robber, if he endeavours to break into my house to execute a writ, notwithstanding that I know he has such a warrant, and such a legal authority, as will impower him to arrest me abroad. And why this should not hold in the highest, as well as in the most inferior magistrate, I would gladly be informed. Is it reasonable, that the eldest brother, because he has the greatest part of his father's estate, should thereby have a right to take away any of his younger brothers portions? or that a rich man, who possessed a whole country, should from thence have a right to seize, when he pleased, the cottage and garden of his poor neighbour? The being rightfully possessed of great power and riches, exceedingly beyond the greatest part of the sons of Adam, is so far from being an excuse, much less a reason, for rapine and oppression, which the endamaging another without authority is, that it is a great aggravation of it: for the exceeding the bounds of authority is no more a right in a great, than in a petty officer; no more justifiable in a king than a constable; but is so much the worse in him, in that he has more trust put in him, has already a much greater share than the rest of his brethren, and is supposed, from the advantages of his education, employment, and counsellors, to be more knowing in the measures of right and wrong."         _ John Locke : Second Treatise of Civil Government,           Chapter xviii : Of  Tyranny May this message serves as the 29th PERSUASIVE APPEAL for you to reconsider your position with respect to your appreciation of cases GR-183273 and AC-10084 and institute through your own volition disciplinary actions against erring guardians of law in relation to the cases mentioned as preliminary to showing convincing evidences proving that the court is not acting in collusion with Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation,  its officers and managers, jointly and severally,  to perpetuate pain and suffering and  injustice against me and my family. Otherwise, you all, are in admission of the act of collusion between Shell, her lawyers and you, having unity of purpose,  to perpetuate injustice, pain and suffering against me and my family, as charged. Sincerely, Antonio L. Buensuceso Jr. [1] video REAL PROBLEM CONFRONTING US [2] ITEM 9.2 TAKEN FROM MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION  DATED 30 OCTOBER 2008 9.2 Ang aking pong INQUIRY sa nawawalang minutes of CBA negotiations meetings na kung saan pinag-usapan ang paksang pang - economic o pasuweldo ay hindi rin po nabigyang halaga at lubusang pag-aararal ng mga pinagdaanang hukuman. Na, kung ito po ay nabigyan daan na busisiin, matutunghayan po nila, na itong natapos na CBA ay punong-puno ng hinihinalang anomalya at controversiya, dahil sa bukod sa itinago nila ang minutes tungkol dito ay, inalisan pa nila nang dalawang NON-OFFICER union member na tumatayong bantay o witness sa negotiation. Ang TRANSPARENCY sa gaganaping negotiation ay alam naming mga kasapi sa unyon na KAILANGAN kaya po ninais naming makapag-formulate ngGROUND RULES for the CONDUCT OF NEGOTIATIONS silang mga opisyales ng unyon at management panel. Kasama po rito ang requirement ng MINUTES at dalawang NON-OFFICER union member bilang witness . Ang GROUND RULES pong ito ay hiniling naming mga kasapi sa unyon, naisulat at napagkasunduan at sinunod ng buong husay noong pag-usapan ay non-economic benefits, ngunit noong pag-usapan ang pasueldo, ay nabalutan ito ng hinihinalang kabuktutan at misteryo. Ang kaganapang ito ay nagbunsod ng matinding pagdududa sa kadalisayan, kalinisan ng ginanap na negotiation. Lalo pa nga po, noong makalipas ang isa O dalawang linggo na matapos ang CBA ay pinagkalooban ng SHELL ng isang marangyang piging ang mga opisyal ng unyon sa isang kilalang Hotel sa Makati. Ganoon din po, makalipas ang isa O dalawang buwan, ang dalawa pong mataas na lider ng unyon ay pumunta sa SINGAPORE at sa THAILAND na company sponsored trip, sinabi po nilang seminar o training. Marami pong lalo ang naghihinala sa mga misteryong nakapaloob dito at sila ay nagsimulang magsiyasat at magtanong-tanong at ang pormal na INQUIRY ay sinimulan ko. Dapat sana ay natuklasan ang dahilan kung bakit na kung kailan na mayroong INQUIRY o pagsisiyasat sa maaring pandaraya o kabuktutan naganap sa nakatapos na CBA negotiations, kung kailan naman ako tinanggal sa trabaho. Hindi kaya nais lamang ng kumpanya na matigil na itong pagsisiyasat sa dahilang baka matuklasan ang kanilang mga pagkakasala at natakot sa kanilang pananagutan kapag ang mga iyon ay napatunayan. At upang mahinto ang INQUIRY ay naisip nilang tangalin ako. Sinibak nga nila ako. Translated to English : 9.2 My INQUIRY with regard to the missing minutes of CBA Negotiation meetings where the discussion on money matters or economic provisions or salaries and wages were not taken into consideration by the lower courts. If ever the lower courts should have been impartial, prudent, diligent, and meticulous, they should have witnessed and determined, that the recently concluded 2001 Collective Bargaining Agreement Negotiations was peppered with imminent anomalies and controversies (corruption).  It is because, aside from omitting or hiding the minutes of the negotiation meetings with regard to the economic provisions,  they (UNION and Management acting in collusion) had excluded the presence of two non-officer union members acting as witnesses to the negotiations. Transparency in the conduct of the negotiations, we, as members of the union, were aware of its importance and necessity, hence,  we made sure that the GROUND RULES FOR THE CONDUCT OF NEGOTIATIONS be formulated and written. Salient in this Ground Rule, are the requirements for written minutes of meetings and  the presence of two non-officer members of the union acting as witnesses to the negotiation. We, as members of the union, required that these set of rules be followed and observed.   As expected,the GROUND RULES had been faithfully implemented during the negotiations of the non-economic issues. However, when the negotiation on money matters came they (Union and Management acting in collusion), stealthily  conducted the negotiations in caves known only to them, omitting minutes and precluding witnesses thereon. This event embarked to an episode of nagging doubts and distrust by the union members toward the set of officers who represented them in the 2001 CBA negotiation; And even bolstered by the fact, that after one or a couple of weeks, SHELL management gave a sumptous party to the union officers to a famous hotel in Makati. Similarly,  after one or a couple of months, two high ranking union officers was sent to Singapore, then to Thailand sponsored by the company guised as seminar or training.  Many union members sensed something was wrong and grossly improper and then posed questions about the issue and on my part,  I started the formal inquiry. But, it was perplexing that while I started and doing the formal inquiry and at the brink of unearthing truth after another, it was when Shell took me out of employment. Shell and her cohorts obviously fearsome of the outcome of my formal inquiry which would inevitably exposed them to at least, shame if not criminal or civil culpability, if ever the inquiry pushed through;  hence, Bersamin, through abuse of management prerogative and implicit cooperation and approval of the officers of the union involved in the fiasco, had successfully booted me out Shell before the inquiry came ever to fruition. LETTER REQUEST FOR THE COMPLETE MINUTES OF NEGOTIATION MEETINGS LETTER OF INQUIRY  AND REQUEST THAT THE UNWRITTEN  MINUTES OF MEETING  BE WRITTEN TO SERVE AS BASIS FOR COMING DISCUSSION OF ISSUES PERTAINING TO UNION AND MANAGEMENT RELATIONS GROUND RULES IN THE CONDUCT OF CBA NEGOTIATIONS ENLARGED VIEW OF ITEM 9

Do you have grounds for a lawsuit against Shell? Have you, your firm or family been cheated or injured by Shell?

Apr 16th, 2015

by John Donovan.

If the answer to any of the above questions is yes, then you may find this article by John Donovan to be of interest…

The first difficulty faced by potential litigants considering suing Shell, is finding a law firm with the required resources which does not have a conflict of interest and is willing to confront an opponent quite literally prepared to stop at nothing.

In this connection we may be able to assist by providing introductions at law firms in the UK or Holland with a track record of winning cases against Shell.

The owner of this website has been a participant in countless proceedings with Shell stretching back to 1993. 

Consequently, I know most Shell litigation moves including the use of:

* unscrupulous solicitors
* undercover activity
* witness intimidation
* threats
* jurisdiction ploys
* burying evidence
* tampering with evidence
* holding back discovery documents
* manipulating the news media
* hiding information about the litigation from Shell shareholders
* dragging out litigation to drain the resources of a weaker opponent

Basically nothing is too low for Shell.

Knowing that other parties have had the same problems dealing with Shell can help psychologically and also possibly strengthen a case by providing what is known as “similar fact evidence”. This perhaps explains why one of Shell’s first actions in responding to a case is to ask that the case be sealed, preventing the court documents and documents relating to discovery from reaching the public domain. Even where a case has been sealed, the initial petition is by definition in the public domain, since it was lodged with the court before the case was sealed. Shell does not want news of litigation to circulate in case it reaches the ears of another potential or actual litigant who might be able to supply or benefit from acquiring similar fact evidence.

It has therefore been suggested that we act as a repository of threatened or actual legal proceedings against Shell. This would enable us to compare cases to check for relevance to litigation already in our files and notify relevant parties accordingly, putting them into direct contact if both sides agree. In the event of a pattern of Shell conduct being revealed, perhaps even involving the same Shell individuals, it might enable the cases to proceed more expeditiously and potentially even persuade Shell to settle out of court rather than allowing predatory conduct to be exposed in open court.

Consequently, if you have a legal grievance against Shell you are invited to report it to us. If legal documents are already in the public domain we will, with your permission, publish them. If the information is confidential we will only share it with another party with a similar grievance if you give us clearance to do so.

It can be sent directly to me at: john@shellnews.net

Our own experiences with Shell: At the beginning of our legal battles with Shell we knew nothing about such shady tactics but were well aware of the daunting challenge of taking on a multinational Goliath which has an army of in-house lawyers supported by unlimited financial resources and a ruthless unscrupulous management. We thought we were on our own in having to threaten ligation after a Shell manager stole our intellectual property. Then in a meeting I had with a Shell Chairman, he let it slip that other firms were also threatening to launch legal proceedings on the same basis about the same Shell national manager. In other words, the Shell manager in question had been accused of stealing ideas from other parties who, like us, had disclosed information on a confidential basis believing they could trust Shell. The then Shell Chairman, Dr Chris Fay, claimed that he could not agree to settle our claim because it would set a precedent. This was a major concern in view of the fact that other potential litigants were pressing Shell. Royal Dutch Shell did later did settle for £200,000 (approximately $400,000.)

 RELATED

Corporate espionage: Shell Cloak and Dagger activities

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: Business Principles, John Donovan, Litigation, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shell.
Tagged: John Donovan · Litigation · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

← Shell/Exxon Induced Earthquakes undermine Dutch Gov Revenues

A Halt to Groningen Production Could Significantly Impact on Shell’s Remaining Reserves →

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

The TRUTH will set you FREE.